Euthanasia is a subject of intense debate over time. It has been a licit issue in human rights discourse as it also affects the ethical and legal issues, pertaining to patients and health care providers. The objectives of this paper is to delineate the ethical dilemma of euthanasia, to review the forms of euthanasia, analyze the significance of the issue to nursing practice, discuss the pros and cons of euthanasia, while allowing the reader to form his or her own opinion when presented with the facts and arguments of both sides.
Keywords: euthanasia, nursing, ethics, ethical dilemma
Euthanasia
Everyone has a purpose in life, if asked many people would probably want to live to their old age, and then die peacefully in their sleep. Unfortunately, this is not the reality most people face. Some may die after many longsuffering and painful diseases. Others may find that as they age their body deteriorates to such a degree that they wish they were dead. Those who cannot die quickly might opt to culminate their suffering, by committing suicide. However, those who are no able to do so may seek assistance with their death.
Euthanasia, often called "mercy killing", has been for many years widely debated in countries around the word (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2014).The act of euthanasia is the “action undertaken by a physician, whose intent is to end the life of a person at his or her request” (Dierckx De Casterle B., Denier ´Y., De Bal N. & Gastmans C, 2010).This act involves injecting the person with a lethal drug to hasten their death. However, euthanasia should not be confused with physician assisted suicide. In the practice of physician assisted suicide, the patient makes the final administration of the l...
... middle of paper ...
... our purpose is to provide the ultimate an effective care to our patients when they are in pain. However, when they are suffering from incurable diseases our first instinct is to manage their pain and keep them comfortable until they pass-away, but in this particular situation treating the pain is not what they desire. In the end everyone is entitled to their own rights, but as far as my faith is concerned killing is wrong and is considered a sin in the eyes of god.
Conclusion
In conclusion the medical, ethical and legal issue involving the legislation of euthanasia is a complex and challenging issues. It is hard to see people suffer, and nurses have a duty to comfort those in need, but it is also a part of life. However I think that the practice of euthanasia should not be legalized, because there is not enough compelling reasons to why this act should be legal.
The Hippocratic Oath states that “I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel”. Euthanasia is where someone intentionally kills a person whose life is felt not to be worth living. It is definitely a controversial topic with many opinions on whether or not it should be legalized.
Any discussion that pertains to the topic of euthanasia must first include a clear definition of the key terms and issues. With this in mind, it should be noted that euthanasia includes both what has been called physician-assisted "suicide" and voluntary active euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide involves providing lethal medication(s) available to the patient to be used at a time of the patient’s own choosing (Boudreau, p.2, 2014). Indifferently, voluntary active euthanasia involves the physician taking an active role in carrying out the patient’s request, and usually involves intravenous delivery of a lethal substance. Physician-assisted suicide is felt to be easier psychologically for the physician and patient than euthanasia because
Euthanasia is a word derived from Greek that has the etymological meaning of an easy death through the alleviation of pain (Moreno, 1995). Through the course of history, the signification of the term has changed and evolved in many different definitions. A useful definition of euthanasia on which we will base this essay, is named ‘mercy killing’, which signifies deliberately putting an end to someone’s life to avoid further suffering, as stated by Michael Manning in 1998. The euthanasia debate possesses a strong significance in our modern society. A discussion conducted by both scholars and politicians is going on whether physicians have the right to hasten the death of an individual by the administration of poison. In this essay
Euthanasia has been a very polemic subject in American society. Its objective is to conclude the life of a person at their own request, a family member, or by the determination of a health care professional to avoid unnecessary suffering. There is a lot of moral and ethics involved in euthanasia, exist a big difference between provoke death and allow death. The first one rejects life, the second one accepts its natural end. Every single intentional act of provoke the death of a person without consent is opposed to ethics and is punishable by law. One of the biggest moral controversies in the XXI century is the fact that some people agree in the autonomy humans have to determine the moment of death. The moral and legal implications are huge and the practical benefits are also enormous. This is a touchy and controversial issue and my goal on writing this paper is to remain on favor of euthanasia. I will elaborate later on my reasons to believe and support euthanasia, but first let’s examine the historical perspective of this moral issue.
In today’s modern society the use of euthanasia and assisted suicide is a hot button topic. Due to the argumentative nature of this issue many philosophers have created their own ideas on how euthanasia and assisted suicide benefit or harm society. These philosophers such as Brock and Callahan differ in their arguments about euthanasia and assisted suicide. Like almost all the heavily opinionated topics in society there should be limits to the use thus my consensus regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide is that it should be legalized to a certain extent.
...d and there would be no hope for any recovery and that the patient has knowingly and consented for the procedure. This should not be a process that is established instantly, but it should be well thought out by the patient, the families of the patient and the physician. If the doctor is prepared to acknowledge and decide that there is no hope for his or her patient to recover, they should be able to grant them the requests of assisted suicide. A person should have the choice, with certain conditions, to end their lives in the best way possible to stop suffering from unbearable pain. Although ending a person’s life might be wrong due to religion views, society should be considerate and compassionate to a patient's decision if they decide to end their life when he or she thinks their life becomes worthless and when there is no chance to experience a normal life again.
Should euthanasia be allowed or not? It has become a very controversial issue nowadays. Velleman and Hooker have different perspectives on euthanasia, and whether there should be laws permitting voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. Although there are well-reasoned arguments on both sides, I would strongly agree with Hooker's argument that there should be a law permitting voluntary euthanasia when it is for the wellbeing of the person and that each individual should be able to make their own decision.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
There are two methods of carrying out euthanasia, the first one is active and the second one is passive. Active euthanasia means the physicians deliberately take actions which cause the death of the patients, for example, the injection of sedatives in excess amount. Passive euthanasia is that the doctors do not take any further therapies to keep the ill patients alive such as switching off the life supporting machines [1]. This essay argues that the legalization of the euthanasia should not be proposed nowadays. It begins by analyzing the problem that may cause in relation to the following aspects: ‘slippery slope’ argument, religious view, vulnerable people and a rebuttal against the fair distribution of medical resources. This essay concludes that the legalization of the voluntary euthanasia brings more harm than good.
“Euthanasia is defined as a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending life of another person to relieve that person's suffering and where the act is the cause of death.”(Gupta, Bhatnagar and Mishra) Some define it as mercy killing. Euthanasia may be voluntary, non voluntary and involuntary. When terminally ill patient consented to end his or her life, it is called voluntary euthanasia. Non voluntary euthanasia occurs when the suffering person never consented nor requested to end a life. These patients are incompetent to decide because they are either minor, in a comatose stage or have mental conditions. Involuntary euthanasia is conducted when it is against the will of the patient (Gupta, Bhatnagar, Mishra). Euthanasia can be either passive or active. Passive euthanasia means life-sustaining treatments are withheld and nothing is done to keep the patient alive. Active euthanasia occurs when a physician do something by giving drugs or substances that ends a patient’s life. (Medical News Today)
Euthanasia has been an ongoing debate for many years. Everyone has an opinion on why euthanasia should or should not be allowed but, it is as simple as having the choice to die with dignity. If a patient wishes to end his or her life before a disease takes away their quality of life, then the patient should have the option of euthanasia. Although, American society considers euthanasia to be morally wrong euthanasia should be considered respecting a loved one’s wishes. To understand euthanasia, it is important to know the rights humans have at the end of life, that there are acts of passive euthanasia already in practice, and the beneficial aspects.
In order to provide a framework for my thesis statement on the morality of euthanasia, it is first necessary to define what euthanasia is and the different types of euthanasia. The term Euthanasia originates from the Greek term “eu”, meaning happy or good and “thanatos”, which means death, so the literal definition of the word Euthanasia can be translated to mean “good or happy death”.
The ethical debate regarding euthanasia dates back to ancient Greece and Rome. It was the Hippocratic School (c. 400B.C.) that eliminated the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate for a doctor? More so, euthanasia raises the argument of the different ideas that people have about the value of the human experience.
Suffering has always been in the beginning of time. As long as there is pain and suffering, there will always be people choosing suicide as an answer. There has always been request’s from patients to end their lives back when medicine was first invented. While euthanasia is very limited in the United States, there have been patients that commit suicide on their own to end their suffering from depression. Studies have shown that 57 percent of physicians today have received some type of request from their patients for physician-assisted suicide.